Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal are getting ready for their upcoming two-city exhibition circuit next week. Federer will host Nadal at the Hallenstadion Arena in Zurich, Switzerland Tuesday evening in a match to benefit the Roger Federer Foundation.

The following day, on December 22, Nadal returns the favor inviting Federer inside Madrid’s Magic Box for the “Joining Forces for the Benefit of Children” match with proceeds benefiting the Rafa Nadal Foundation.

Federer’s Foundation aims to help those in Africa and in Switzerland. Nadal’s is focused on helping underprivileged youth.

“This will be the first time the Foundation will introduce an event of this magnitude to so many people and we really hope we can count with their support in all of our projects. This event is particularly special to me because I count with Roger’s support. We are friends and we are both very committed to solidarity,” said Nadal.

Added Federer, “I always enjoy playing Rafa on the big stages and it is especially exciting when we can do it to help raise monies for our foundations. I am sure that the fans in Zurich, Madrid and those around the world who will catch it on TV or the internet will see some exciting tennis for a great cause.”

In the U.S., ESPN2 will have live TV coverage of both matches at 2pm ET on Tuesday and 1pm ET Wednesday. Chris Fowler and Patrick McEnroe will have the call. Check your local TV schedules for those outside of the U.S. Live streaming is also available on ESPN3.com and other outlets.

It’s a great cause, so I hope everyone doesn’t take who wins in both exho’s as “ownership” of the outcome. The “cause” is what matters, it’s “entertainment’ as it has NO impact on rankings. Just sayin for both sides……

Good point, Skeeze. I don’t think anyone has the poor spirit to make a big deal out either win/loss, cause its already a win/win situation that the two greatest player ever are putting together TWO matches for charity!
That feels especially nice this time of year!
For both sides-won’t it be nice to just sit back and watch matches between these gentlemen without all the worry over the outcome? Sighhh…
Ps I bet each will win the other’s tournament ;)

“Good point, Skeeze. I don’t think anyone has the poor spirit to make a big deal out either win/loss”
I can only hope so. Unfortunately there are tards on both sides of the fence who most probably might do so. They are beyond our help, so to say.

I get the feeling Federer would rather like to win these exhos, why would he otherwise say: “Just finishing one of my practices today…getting ready for the exos next Tuesday and Wednesday vs Rafa in Zurich and Madrid.” (facebook, apparently).

On the matter of how seriously to take the exhos, there is the Sean Randall take – they mean nothing – and Andy Murray’s insistence that, for instance, his beating of Nadal in an exhibition was a proper match, each player going hell for leather for the win. Just because points, h2h and so on don’t come into it doesn’t mean they are merely pratting around out on court. It seems to me common sense that these exhos will offer some information about the current form of the 2 players, how they are shaping up against each other etc. Not a lot, perhaps, but not nothing. Also, you just never know the mental significance of a hard fought victory, regardless of its provenance. I am thinking the nature of Murray’s defeat of Nadal did him no harm at all.

As for charity – well, the rich, and not just famous sportsmen, often have recourse to this particular activity, to while away the wee hours of the morning perhaps when conscience tends to kick in. That is their privilege, of course, but I don’t see why the rest of us should go weak at the knees at the spectacle.

Well, it is, but such a blase description doesn’t do Rafa’s foundation justice. It is very involved with Special Olympics where they’re helping 250 kids get ready for tennis competitions plus in the past year they’ve opened up a school in one of the most poverty stricken areas of India. They also concentrate on aid to children with cancer.

This is a wonderful event that will benefit both Rafa and Roger’s foundations. Good luck to both of them.

dunbar, there are exo matches that seem to be played like any other tourney (like the Murray match you mention) and then there are these like the Rafa-Roger charity matches coming up (which will be similar to the Hit for Haiti charoty exos done). For one thing, having microphones on and carrying on banter (as in the H4H) while playing shows that the goal isn’t the win. These 2 great ambassadors of the sport are doing something great to help out those less fortunate at a special time of the year. Other posters here seem to realize the correct goal of these exo’s, and that it isn’t all about the win and whatever their form is during these, does not affect their H2H. I think each will win one to even it out like dari said.

ok. fan4tennis, I accept your correction. As for helping out those less fortunate than themselves, that is easily done without making a great fanfare about it. Some people devote their lives to it – but you’d never know, and that’s the point I was making.

Sometimes fanfare is needed in order for the publicity to bring in more donations and make it a very successful fundraiser, in this instance, to get people to buy tickets and show up at the matches also. They both said they were taking advantage of the interest in their rivalry to try to help out those less fortunate and those in need. More publicity makes for more money for the charities.

That’s a very good point, conclusive in its way. I still find myself squirming a bit, though, when an aura of “goodness” is thrust upon multi-millionaires who can easily afford the time and money spent upon their rather grand sounding projects (the Federer Foundation, etc). This is not true only for sportsmen. The multi-billionaire Bill Gates is apparently engaged in a process of steadily divesting himself of most of his fortune (whilst making very sure that he personally can continue to live a life of luxury). This is an interesting and unusual thing to do, and I am inclined to applaud the Gates’ for their imaginations, whilst not being moved one way or the other by their commitment to charity – that is simply a choice they have made. As for at least some of the showbiz types who get publicly involved in charity – Bob Geldof for instance – what comes across to me is enormous conceit and showing off.

I agree that there are many who do it and announce it to the world, are doing it more for the publicity for themselves. But in these tough economies, all over the world, it still is nice to see that some of the people who can well afford it, are giving and doing things to help out those not as fortunate as themselves. Some do it for personal reasons (close one died or was hurt), some do it for the fact that it is the rught thing to do, and unfortunately, some still just do it to get their names in a paper or think that it automatically makes them a “good person” and erases all the bad.

Personally, I don’t think Rafa and Roger are doing this to gain acclaim for themselves. They don’t need it. They are using their fame and notoriety as rivals to raise money. For two guys, that both have argued for a longer off-season in tennis, to give up their off time and still play tennis for a good cause, speaks volumes to me.

Aside from the sacrifices of time committed to these fund raiser events by the top players, it is also a good opportunity for Fed and Rafa to check out their potential to win the upcoming Australian Open. You can count on them to play their best to win these charity confrontations. They won’t be playing give-away.

Like Sir Bob G or not, what he has done, with the initial “It’s Christmas Time” record and his follow up through Live Aid in 1985 (and even Live 8) it’s really special, imo, and it spurred a whole lot of consciousness about the crisis in Africa. It was awesome and very unique back then, in 85. Now, it’s more common for celebrities to pick a cause and “promote” it, and we hear about it more due to the media juggernaut, esp. since the internet. But it’s still good. Charity can be a condescending thing in a weird way, as Melville makes clear via mockery in “The Confidence Man”, as people throw pennies into a poor man’s mouth. However, generally it’s a good thing.

dunbar, FYI, posts are always moderated if you provide more than one link, which you’ve done with that Murray post. I am not sure why, but just so you know, it’s SOP from what I can tell. That climbing video interested my 9 year old son, needless to say. I couldn’t watch it. Ack.

jane, thanks for your info. About geldof – I observed him from the beginning, and straightaway he struck me as a compulsive self-publicist. That doesn’t have to be the case obviously, some celebrities can be surprisingly self-effacing. And the way he dragged in highly gifted, vain musicians like Mick Jagger and David Bowie just made me want to vomit – the whole thing was so self-congratulatory. I didn’t know his music (“Boomtownrats” or some equally pretentious monicker, I believe) – to this day, I can’t bring myself to listen to it – but my friends told me that even as a musician, he was a notorious bighead (without, apparently, having the least excuse to be so).
But did he do any good? I don’t know the ins and outs of it at all, but I do understand this is a contentious issue – some say he did, some have claimed that the kind of charity he espoused actually ended up doing more harm than good, in the sense of discouraging local iniative. What is certain is that Africa has amply the means to feed itself, but it is still (on the whole) dominated by corrupt, nepotistic governments who have little interest in fighting for their own people. What the answer to this is, God alone knows, but it certainly isn’t Sir Bob Geldof.

Guys, is tennis tv behaving as badly with you as it has with me and a friend? Responding to all problems in watching the action (even after you’ve paid) with a standard and useless ‘Pls clear your cache’ comment? If yes, could we pls let them know on twitter. Thanks.